C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
between nitrogen atoms of 12.3 Å (according to model building
employing the readily available SYBYL computational package).
Consequently, we do not expect that all low-energy conformers of
9 are compatible with attachment of the dye, but only those pos-
sessing the suitable distance between the R-amino group of dF1
and the ꢀ-amino group of K9. Our calculations did not consider
multiple low-energy conformations for the side chain of K9, but it
is quite reasonable to expect that the option selected by the optimi-
zation procedure11 and energy minimization is, at least, one of the
lowest energy options possessing the highest statistical weight in
solution. Therefore, selection of low-energy conformations with the
RN1-ꢀN9 distance in the range of 12 ( 2 Å will rather accurately
define the conformers of 9 most suitable for attachment of the dye.
Such a selection yielded 66 conformations satisfying the above
requirement. This new limited ensemble retains most of the features
of the extended one: it has almost the same percentage of the â-
reversal-like structures (ca. 77%), and again, all close interproton
distances observed in the NMR experiments can be reproduced by
this limited ensemble as a whole. This is in agreement with experi-
mental finding that the same close interproton contacts are charac-
teristic of both 8 and compounds with the dye attached (7). Several
conformers possessing the most (but not all) individual interproton
distances satisfying the NMR data belong to the same cluster of
geometrically similar structures (rms < 2 Å, CR atoms only). Figure
1b shows a representative structure from that cluster.
One advantage of the macrocyclization approach is the possibility
of constraining the bioactive conformations of linear peptides that
may adopt a more flexible conformation. For example, bioactive
linear bombesin peptide analogues that possess a random coil struc-
ture,12 may be forced to adopt a partial â-sheet or helical confor-
mation after cyclization. The robust nature of the structural frame-
work of these macrocyclic compounds lends itself to a variety of
applications, including optimizing and monitoring by NIR optical
methods the bioactivity of putative drugs, improving the in vivo
metabolic stability of fluorescent drugs, enhancing receptor recogni-
tion, modifying spectral properties by altering the macrocyclic ring
size, and elucidating the low-energy conformations of small linear
biomolecules that would otherwise be difficult to obtain.
Figure 1. (a) Expansion of NH-RH region of 600 MHz NOESY spectra
and (b) sketch of a representative structure of 7.
computational modeling data. Proton chemical shifts of 7 were
compared with those of 6 and 8. The proton chemical shifts were
assigned by analysis of TOCSY and NOESY spectra. Sequential
assignments were obtained by using the NH-RH fingerprint region
of the NOESY spectra. All the dRN connections between adjacent
residues were observed and a continuous path indicates the segment
from dF1 to T8 or K9 C-terminal residue. Cyclization through
disulfide S-S bond was evidenced by several observed NH-RH
NOEs between dF1 and C2 as well as between C7 and T8. Strong
NOE between dF1NH and cypate CH2, and between K9ꢀNH and
cypate CH2 and cypate-aromatic protons, confirm the dF1-cypate-
K9 linkage in compound 7. The presence of several RΗi-NHi+2
contacts such as C7-K5, T6-W4, and K5-Y3 suggests a tight
â-reversal conformation of the 20-membered cyclic disulfide
peptide. Furthermore, the observation of RH-RH NOE for the
residues from C2 to C7 indicates the backbone at the cyclic moiety
may deviate from the trans-amide conformation. Of particular
interest is the observation of T6NH-W4RH, T6NH-Y3RH, T6NH-
C2RH, and T8NH-T6RH NOE cross-peaks, suggesting the disulfide
ring closure causes a â-reversal of the peptide in vicinity of T6
bringing T8, W4,Y3, and C2 in close proximity. All three peptides
have similar sequential and RΗi-NHi+2 NOEs except that the T8NH-
T6RH and C7NH-K5RH NOEs were not observed in compound 7
(Figure 1a). This indicates that an additional K9 residue and the
cypate linkage may cause the 20-membered ring to adopt a less
compact topology with a conformational change appearing only at
the residues near the C-terminus of 7.
Acknowledgment. We thank the NSF (BES-0119489, S.A.),
NIH (GM53630, G.V.N.; CA64475, C.J.A.), and Siteman Cancer
Center Barnard Research Fund (S.A.) for financial support and G.
R. Marshall and W. J. Welch for advice.
Supporting Information Available: Detailed descriptions of
synthetic, NMR, and computational modeling procedures. This material
Since the NMR data did not show a strong NOE between the
peptide and the fluorescent probe, the computational modeling was
restricted to the key common element for compounds 6 and 7,
namely, Ac-dF1-cyclo(C2-Y3-dW4-K5-T6-C7)-T8-K9-NH2 (9).
Energy calculations were performed in general accordance with a
published procedure10 (see Supporting Information for detailed des-
cription). The most characteristic feature of the obtained ensemble
of low-energy conformers (206 structures of peptide backbone) is
the distinct â-reversal centered on the dW4-K5 fragment. About
79% of low-energy structures possess that feature as compared to
the six-residue â-reversal template (rms less than 2 Å, CR atoms
only). None of the individual structures satisfied all the 13 nonse-
quential interproton restraints suggested by NMR measurements.
However, the ensemble of the found low-energy structures as a
whole fully satisfies the NMR restraints, since for every experi-
mentally observed NOE it is possible to find the corresponding
interproton distance in the range under 4.5 Å in a number of low-
energy conformers, which comprise from 6% to 52% of the entire
ensemble depending on the particular NOE.
References
(1) Ntziachristos, V.; Tung, C. H.; Bremer, C.; Weissleder, R. Nat. Med. 2002,
8, 757.
(2) Hawrysz, D. J.; Sevick-Muraca, E. M. Neoplasia 2000, 2, 388.
(3) Achilefu, S.; Dorshow, R. B.; Bugaj, J. E.; Rajagopalan, R. InVest. Radiol
2000, 35, 479.
(4) Ballou, B.; Fisher, G. W.; Deng, J. S.; Hakala, T. R.; Srivastava, M.; et
al. Cancer Detect. PreV. 1998, 22, 251.
(5) Achilefu, S.; Jimenez, H. N.; Dorshow, R. B.; Bugaj, J. E.; Webb, E. G.;
et al. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 2003.
(6) Belvisi, L.; Bernardi, A.; Checchia, A.; Manzoni, L.; Potenza, D.; et al.
Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 1001.
(7) Kasher, R.; Oren, D. A.; Barda, Y.; Gilon, C. J. Mol. Biol. 1999, 292,
421.
(8) Mujumdar, R. B.; Ernst, L. A.; Mujumdar, S. R.; Lewis, C. J.; Waggoner,
A. S. Bioconjugate Chem. 1993, 4, 105.
(9) Reubi, J. C.; Schar, J. C.; Waser, B.; Wenger, S.; Heppeler, A.; et al.
Eur. J. Nucl. Med. 2000, 27, 273.
(10) Nikiforovich, G. V. Int. J. Pept. Protein Res. 1994, 44, 513.
(11) Nikiforovich, G. V.; Hruby, V. J.; Prakash, O.; Gehrig, C. A. Biopolymers
1991, 31, 941.
(12) Carver, J. Eur. J. Biochem. 1987, 168, 193.
The dye itself is conformationally rigid, since its polyethylene
chain most likely is fixed in all-trans configuration with the distance
JA034186O
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 125, NO. 26, 2003 7767